BuzzerBeater Forums

I guess you have some examples about matches where the other team has played TiE with enthusiasm 10 while the other one normalled with enthusiasm 5. And the team that normalled won.

I somehow haven't seen the examples that confirm your thesis, either.

The enthusiasm system is fine. There should be a way allowing weaker teams to win with proper team management over the course of the season.

Not to mention that things have gotten a little different with the new way that enthusiasm is implemented this season.

maybe in the course of the regular season... but why in the play-offs?

Enthusiasm is working exactly as before the changes. What has changed is the attitude (CT/TIE). We all think these two concepts are related, so they are controlling the same thing (defense and rebound in the old GE). But with the new GE they have different effects:

- Enthusiasm is modulating your defense/rebounding team abilities.
- Attitude is giving you more chances of success in nearly all aspects of the game (shot %, asisstances, less fouls, more blocks...), which can turn a a really bad team into competitive.

At the moment, bad managers are still bad enough and they don´t take advantage of all the CTing features. i.e. One team playing against CT roughly make double faults than the other team, so a team training FT will easily get 15-20 point more, just because of playing CT.
I have played recently two TIE vs Normal matches, with the faults balance: 15/25, 11/20.
Do you think this "side-effect" of CT is fair? logic?

I began to TIE seven games ago. I won the first three (to get to 17-0) and got my Enthusiasm to 9 to 10 on game day. Since then, I've gone 1-3 including 0-2 at home. I don't understand what's going on. My ratings are significantly better than my opponents' but its not being reflected in the score.

If home court advantage, higher enthusiasm going in while playing TIE and higher ratings generated during the game are not enough to over come a team playing at NORMAL, then the game engine is seriously wrong as far as I'm concerned.

The reasons for that conclusion are that I planned as best the game allows and got good ratings, but the performance was terrible. If good planning produces lousy results three games out of four, there is a huge problem, one I'm not likely to put up with for more than a few weeks of real-life time.

If I get poor results in the new draft (I'll be picking last but have 2 scouting units per week coming to me, compared to many new teams in my league) I doubt very much I'll hang around for another season, even after being promoted.

I don't think I'm unusual in feeling that way, either.

How often should the #4 seed be able to beat the #1 seed by playing CT vs. normal?

That's a tough question - not all #4 and #1 seeds are created equal.

It's hard to fit that into one box for the thousands of 4-1 matchups each season.

I think many times... 4 place don't have what they can lost agains 1st place, 1 place are thinking about final, and can't play CT, so they play normal against 4 place, 4 place CT and they win, next stage lost agains 2/3 place and thats all.. I also agree that in playoff it need to dagree CT effect

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Also I have one more question where will be play final if in the final will play EAST 1st team and WEST 1st team ? I think it would be better play in neutral arena, and get money 50/50

Last edited by Vycka at 4/17/2008 1:56:49 PM

How often should the #4 seed be able to beat the #1 seed by playing CT vs. normal?

If, as your data suggest, the CT (vs. normal) compensates for the home court advantage... than the result is mainly up to the teams strength.
If that is the case it seems really fair to me :)